Despite our best efforts, we may have let down the good people of the Olentangy school district
last week.

But not for a lack of trying.

Part of our job is to keep you informed of things as they happen and, whenever possible, before
they happen — especially when your tax dollars are at stake.

Last week, the Olentangy Board of Education and its teachers union reached a tentative agreement
on a new labor contract. Reporter Collin Binkley requested a copy of the agreement on Monday after
sources told us that both sides had agreed to terms. We wanted to report the details in advance of
votes by both teachers and the school board so that district taxpayers and teachers would know what
was being considered.

It’s a fairly standard story and one we see as a duty to report.

Other school districts routinely provide such information, as state law requires. But Olentangy’s
attorney, Gregory B. Scott, played hide-and-seek with public records, using semantics,
gamesmanship and obfuscation to delay the release. For three days.When editors read Scott’s initial
response to our request, we were surprised at what we viewed as his arrogance in representing a
publicly elected board of education and the taxpayers of one of central Ohio’s largest school
districts.

I wondered whether we were just being overly sensitive to the words of a lawyer who was
stiff-arming the public.

You decide:

“You assume that . . . there is some document that management has compiled as a complete ‘
Tentative Agreement,’ ” Scott wrote. “That is an erroneous assumption. There is a ‘tentative
agreement’ in a conceptual sense, much like the conceptual notion that this is the ‘year 2012’ — in
fact, it takes the earth more than 365 days to circle the sun, and whether it is 2012 depends on
what religion or culture is keeping track. But neither I nor the District’s management have
prepared or compiled ‘the tentative agreement,’ let alone circulated it to the BOE.”

Interesting. It’s clear from the email that there was a tentative agreement, but Scott suggested
it was only in
concept. Little, if anything, was in writing, according to Scott. The public wasn’t going
to find out what negotiators had agreed to until he decided they should know. Scott went so far as
to advise the public officials on the board and its tax-paid superintendent not to give any
information to the public through
The Dispatch.

After waiting two days for information, Alan Miller, our managing editor for news, sent this
response early Wednesday to Scott:

“We’re not dealing with conceptual notions here. And we’re not playing semantics games. We’re
asking for documents that clearly are public records. The union is going to vote on something
tonight. We asked to see related documents in the district’s possession on Monday. The law allows
time for making copies. It doesn’t allow 24-48 hours for inspection of records. It requires that
public bodies make them available for immediate inspection during business hours. We understand
from various sources that documents exist detailing the tentative agreement, and that the
administration and board members have copies.”

Scott decided the public could obtain the information at 5:01 p.m. on Wednesday, shortly before
the teachers union was scheduled to vote. It was sent by one of Scott’s colleagues, who wrote, “
While the district does concede it is a public record, it is now providing it to you.”

The 43-page document titled “Tentative Agreement” was full of details and was dated “final” on
May 8 — nearly a week before we requested it.

We asked Scott to talk about his interpretation of the law and whether he intended to withhold
information from the people of the Olentangy district. He declined, sending along an email:

“As an attorney I give advice and representation to clients for fees. I gave advice and
representation to Olentangy LSD in negotiations this year, and there is no reason for me now to
discuss my legal advice with the Editor. I know the media would like for there to be bright lines
in black and white for interpreting and applying the public records law, but often there are gray
areas. Reasonable legal minds can differ, which is why parties can contest the issue in Ohio
courts.”

Had we sued the district, he would have had to explain himself. Then, he would have received
more legal fees, paid by Olentangy taxpayers.

Olentangy's school board voted in 2008 to keep the names of its superintendent candidates
private, and Scott was its attorney.Our fundamental belief is that the public cares about access to
information that affects their taxes and their lives — and those of their children.

We think the public should be informed before votes on public contracts occur. Maybe we’re
idealistic. But your feedback on such issues over the years tells me that you favor transparency
over secrecy in government.

Benjamin J. Marrison is editor of The Dispatch
. You can read his blog at dispatch.com/blogs.